Pokerstars no limit rake

[Cry Me A River]

Or this one I posted earlier:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...;gonew=1#UNREAD

[gameplay]

on pokertracker the rake we see on the General info is the rake which we have exactly pay from our personal winning pots?

thx for helping the retarded moron grandmelon.
i found that useful link from there if the numbers are right.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1


it would also be good if we had and the /limit rake/100 hands like on jhill3535 post.
i have that numbers which should be near i think.
6max no limit starting at 25NL
4
5.6
7.2
11.2
15.2
18.4
21.6


and for full ring no limit 25nl
2.4
3.6
4.8
7.8
10.8
13.2
15.6


are these numbers right?

[jhill3535]

When you look at the numbers from the General tab, you can't really compare them to other's numbers. Style really contributes to these numbers. You are correct that these numbers are the rake that is taken from the pots that you win.

If you play a very laggy style you are winning and losing more pots, and therefore having more rake taken from pots that you won as opposed to a tight nit.

I think the numbers from the summary tab are very accurate and useful, with 9 players at the table and a wide range of playing styles over a meaningful sample of hands, most players should see a convergance of the rake/hand and average pot no matter the players playing style. These numbers however can differ by normal playing hours as some times and/or days play tighter on average than others.

On FTP, these numbers are very accurate for FTP points since they pay 1 pt for every $ collected in rake and you get partial points for pots that are raked less than $1. The difference is on PS where you only get a point if $0.40 is raked from the pot. At NL100 and below, this can be fairly regularly. I think most hands with a flop at NL200 will generate 1 VPP. Then on top of that you only get a 2nd point at Full Ring when the rake reaches $3, so only on $60 pots. This size pot is not that regular at NL100 and below, so you are infrequently earning that 2nd FPP, but you can't tell by your MGR's without filtering by amount of rake to figure the number of VPPs you earned.

[Renton]

the reason its a retarded question is because different players pay different rake depending on their style. If you are playing every pot then you are going to pay a lot more rake then someone who folds 90% of their hands.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
the reason its a retarded question is because different players pay different rake depending on their style. If you are playing every pot then you are going to pay a lot more rake then someone who folds 90% of their hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think this is why it's a good question.

There are many variables when it comes to rake, and obviously looseness/tightness is one of them.

[1p0kerboy]

Also, this is why the forum should definitely be split.

A new poster comes on here and asks a kinda beginner-ish (in some ways) question. He gets slammed and told that his question is retarded.

Do you guys think this kind of treatment is going to encourage growth? Of course not.

Most everybody should be ashamed of themselves for their responses in this thread.

I certainly wouldn't support bottomset as a mod if that is the way he is going to act.

You guys make me not want to even participate here anymore.

[jhill3535]

[ QUOTE ]
the reason its a retarded question is because different players pay different rake depending on their style. If you are playing every pot then you are going to pay a lot more rake then someone who folds 90% of their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true in the sense of how much rake an individual player contributes to the total rake, but I think that average rake/hand is at least pretty close for all players at a given level once a substantial sample is obtained, and I am talking about rake regardless of who contributed it.

The only way that it would be substantially different is if you were really good or really bad at table selection. But over a very large sample you are going to sit at tables with players with very high VPIP's and very low ones, and for all hero's it should be fairly close to even.

Basically it is true that a person who plays more hand will contribute more to the rake than players at the same table that play substantially less hands, but the average rake per hand for the table is going to be fairly uniform across levels at a particular site.

[r1tony]

If you're already on stars can you still get on some rakeback sites/deals? Sorry for the newb question but everything I have seen has been for 'new' accounts.

[jhill3535]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're already on stars can you still get on some rakeback sites/deals? Sorry for the newb question but everything I have seen has been for 'new' accounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stars doesn't have "rakeback" per se. The different VIP levels have different a bonus that you can purchase which effectively translates into rakeback. Full Tilt does have rakeback, but it is only for "new" accounts

[r1tony]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're already on stars can you still get on some rakeback sites/deals? Sorry for the newb question but everything I have seen has been for 'new' accounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stars doesn't have "rakeback" per se. The different VIP levels have different a bonus that you can purchase which effectively translates into rakeback. Full Tilt does have rakeback, but it is only for "new" accounts

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the information. Appreciate it.